Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you so much for your testimony.
• Thank you so much for your testimony.
• opportunity to provide some testimony opportunity to provide some testimony today.<00:28:36.640>
• Thank you so much for your testimony. Thank you so much for your testimony.
• of, um, really great testimony. of, um, really great testimony.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony.
• If you'll hang out here, we testimony.
• Thank you so much, Chair your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony, Ms. Wolf.
• That's the end of testimony, Mr. Gecky.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Boots, if you'd start your testimony and state your name for the record. Thank you, Chair.
• And thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony, Miss Larson.
• Go ahead with your name for the record and begin your testimony. I'm Chris P.
• They don't always get them well, but thank you very much for your testimony.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have oral testimony scheduled for today, and people have signed up.
• Bill, thank you for your testimony.
• It's there, and it's also in my written testimony.
• Thanks again to be a testimony, Steve.
• Thanks again to be a testimony, Steve.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on the future of payments and sales transactions by credit card heard extensive testimony from credit union, banking, retail, restaurant, and payments-industry representatives about proposals to limit interchange fees, especially on the tax and tip portions of transactions. Several witnesses opposed state-level restrictions, arguing they would create a patchwork of rules, burden state-chartered institutions, raise compliance complexity, and ultimately reduce resources for fraud prevention, cybersecurity, rewards, and access to credit. Others, including retail and merchant advocates, said swipe fees are a significant and growing cost for small businesses and that states should consider reforms such as limiting fees on taxes and tips, allowing surcharging, improving transparency in merchant contracts, and studying collection costs more closely. Witnesses also discussed recent legal and regulatory developments, including Illinois’s interchange-fee law, OCC and NCUA interim rules, and the ongoing Visa/Mastercard antitrust settlement. Industry representatives said the Illinois law has been delayed and is likely preempted for most transactions, while merchant advocates argued the state efforts and court rulings show that networks and banks do not set fees competitively. The proposed antitrust settlement was described by some as a meaningful but limited merchant victory, with temporary fee reductions and expanded surcharge/steering rights, while others said it still falls short of structural reform. The commission members pressed witnesses on the practical effects of fees, the cost of cash, whether merchants can pass costs through, and whether small businesses are actually seeing benefits from the current system. Members repeatedly emphasized the need for a fair middle ground that protects both small businesses and the payment system. No substantive votes or policy actions were taken beyond accepting testimony, and the meeting ended with adjournment after all scheduled witnesses had spoken.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we will now go forward on that hearing, and we'll begin by taking testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you, sir.
• Who else is here to provide testimony after this witness?
• Is there any further testimony? Okay, seeing none, that will conclude public testimony.
• And with public testimony concluded, The committee will reconvene here, and with public testimony concluded

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you very much for your testimony. No further testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony. No further testimony.
• Okay, members, for both bills, we've had all the testimony.
• Okay, thank you for your testimony. I appreciate it.
• Okay, there's no further public testimony.

Bills: HB2014, HB2156, HB2180, HB2554, HCR2047, HR2002

Keywords: air emissions, fuel blends, environmental quality, feasibility study, Arizona Department of Agriculture, livestock, compensation, funding, ranching, agriculture, appropriation, University of Arizona, education, state budget, biennial budget, state funding, appropriations, budget procedures, fiscal years, Judea

Summary: The committee first took up HCR 2047 and the identical HCR 2002, both sponsored by the chair. The resolutions recognize the historical, biblical, and legal legitimacy of Judea and Samaria, encourage those terms in official state communications, and reject the term West Bank as a modern political construct. Staff and several proponents, including representatives of an Israel-Arizona business coalition, a rabbi, and a StandWithUs representative, argued the language is historically accurate and important for truth, legal clarity, and Arizona’s relationship with Israel. No one testified against either measure. HCR 2047 passed 10-6 with 2 not voting, and HCR 2002 passed 11-6 with 1 not voting, both with due pass recommendations. The committee then considered HB 2554, which would move Arizona to a biennial state budget process and biennial capital planning. The sponsor argued the change would make government smaller, more disciplined, and less prone to long budget fights and spending growth. JLBC staff provided historical context, explaining Arizona’s past use of annual, bifurcated, and biennial budgeting and noting that second-year budgets are often adjusted for revenue and caseload changes. Members raised concerns about legislative leverage, executive flexibility, and whether the state already effectively budgets on a multi-year basis. Testimony was mixed: one supporter said the change could improve budget clarity, while others voted present or no, citing uncertainty and the need for more study. HB 2554 received a due pass recommendation on a 9-7 vote with 2 present. Next, HB 2014 was amended and passed. The bill directs ADEQ and the Department of Agriculture to study gasoline blend emissions and feasibility for seasonal fuel use in certain areas, with appropriations for the studies. The sponsor said Arizona’s fuel supply is vulnerable because of federal EPA rules and reliance on out-of-state refineries, especially California. Some members supported the study as a way to address possible fuel shortages, while others said prior stakeholder work had shown little could be done and questioned the cost. After adopting the Livingston amendment, the committee gave HB 2014 a due pass recommendation on a 12-2 vote with 4 present. The committee also advanced HB 2180, which funds the University of Arizona’s AZ Reach program, after adopting an amendment reducing the appropriation from $2.5 million to $500,000. The sponsor and a rural physician testified that AZ Reach helps small hospitals coordinate patient transfers, freeing clinicians to focus on care and improving access for rural communities. A program director explained that AZ Reach handles the administrative logistics of transfers for sending hospitals. Some members supported the program but noted concerns about the amount and ongoing budget negotiations, while others said the receiving hospitals needed to be part of the discussion. The bill passed with a due pass recommendation. Finally, HB 2156, as amended, appropriates $250,000 for the livestock compensation fund to help ranchers with wolf depredation losses and conflict-avoidance measures. A Game and Fish representative said the current federal grant funding is insufficient and unstable, while members debated the use of general funds and the program’s priorities. The bill received a due pass recommendation on a 10-7 vote with 1 not voting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We will hear testimony, invited testimony from Texas Parks and Wildlife Department.
• Hearing none, we will proceed to invited testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. At this time we'll go to.
• But thank you all for your testimony.
• First of all, thank you all for your testimony today.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Middleton moves that testimony be limited to three minutes and public testimony to limit up to
• First of all, thank you very much for your testimony.
• Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony this morning.
• I appreciate your testimony.
• Hearing and seeing none, public testimony is now closed.

Bills: SB9, SB 9

Keywords: property tax, ad valorem tax, voter-approval tax rate, no-new-revenue tax rate, tax rate calculation, Tax Code, local government finance, municipality, county, special taxing unit, sales and use tax, property tax cap, tax rollback, tax levy, maintenance and operations, debt rate, disaster relief rate, Texas Legislature, local taxing unit, school assessment

Transcript Highlights:

• The department stands on a certain testimony offering our support, with comments, and I am here for any
• Wait, I'd also like to note we have written testimony from the following individuals: Joan Leong, in
• support; Lynn Mol, in support; Kon Shizuma, in support; testimony from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs
• We didn't include that in our testimony, but I can follow up and get back to you.
• <00:14:29.959> but didn't include that in Our Testimony but didn't include that in Our Testimony

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection and Economic Development and Tourism committees heard S.B. 890, which would have prohibited the sale, display, or marketing of products labeled as poi unless wholly derived from Hawaii-grown taro. The Attorney General’s Office raised Commerce Clause and free speech concerns, and the Department of Agriculture offered support with comments. Testimony was mixed: several individuals and organizations supported the bill as a way to protect the cultural integrity and purity of poi and support local taro farmers, while an industry representative opposed the bill as written, arguing that poi is a process, that the language was too restrictive, and that the industry already faces taro shortages and supply variability. Committee members also discussed the limited supply of local kalo, the use of imported taro for tabletop products, and the need to expand production. After testimony, the committees recommended passing S.B. 890 with amendments. The amendment package would convert the measure from a prohibition to a labeling requirement so poi made with ingredients from outside Hawaii must be labeled with the origins of those ingredients, remove references specifically to taro to accommodate other ingredients, add a severability clause, and set a defective date of July 1, 2050. The measure was adopted, with one senator voting with reservations and the rest voting aye. The committees then took up previously heard measures. S.B. 281, relating to telehealth, was recommended for passage with amendments to reinstate an opt-out from video conferencing in the definition of interactive telecommunications software; it was adopted. S.B. 1449, relating to prior authorization of health care services, was recommended for passage unamended and was also adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have some observations and maybe some testimony to refute.
• I have some observations and maybe some testimony to refute.
• But I will give other testimony full consideration before I make my final decision.
• Is there any portion of that angel— I know it was mentioned in previous testimony, witness testimony,
• Has anyone come in that would like to give opposition testimony to Senate Bill 1694?

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:01:40.800> you And if you look at our testimony, you And if you look at our testimony
• And we do have two pieces of supportive testimony.
• And I've conferred with myself and I will be taking— testimony. And I've conferred with testimony.
• I guess my testimony here. So, hi.
• I actually have three points of concern as part of my testimony.

Bills: HCR202

Keywords: Hawaii, renewable energy, task force, energy independence, cost savings, decarbonization, public utilities, stakeholders, clean energy goals, 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees on Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs and Consumer Commerce and Consumer Protection heard HCR 202 HD2, a resolution creating a task force to study Hawaii’s electric generation mix and related costs. Testimony from the Hawaii State Energy Office was neutral and stood on written comments, while another testifier supported the resolution, emphasizing affordability, reliability, and the need to understand the right balance of thermal generation and renewables as the state moves toward its 2045 renewable goals. The chairs said they had conferred on the measure and outlined recommended amendments, including adding study of the separation of ownership and control of generation versus transmission and distribution, and adding Senate committee representation to the task force. The Consumer Commerce and Consumer Protection committee voted to pass HCR 202 HD2 with amendments; the chair, vice chair, and another member voted aye, with one senator excused, and the recommendation was adopted. The Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs committee did not have quorum at that time and said it would take its vote later. The Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs committee also heard HCR 165, concerning pickleball courts in Hawaii Kai. One resident testified in opposition, citing concerns about permanent lights, permanent nets, noise, light pollution, safety, maintenance, and the loss of multi-use flexibility. After discussion, the chair recommended passing the measure as is, and the committee said it would vote the next day because it lacked quorum. The committee also heard HCR 154 and HCR 43 with the Transportation Committee; HCR 154 was passed unamended, and HCR 43, which urged raised crosswalks near Ala Wai Elementary School for pedestrian safety, was also passed unamended. Supporters of HCR 43 described heavy pedestrian traffic, schoolchildren crossing, and unsafe vehicle turning patterns at the intersections. The Transportation Committee adopted both recommendations, while the Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs committee scheduled its votes for the following day.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any neutral testimony on the phone lines, Ava? Thank you, Chair.
• We submitted written testimony for multiple J-1 visa educators.
• Okay, seeing none, AVH, any opposition testimony?
• AVH, we'll stay right here with the phone line for neutral testimony.
• Any neutral testimony for Assembly Bill 472?

Bills: SB175, SB277, SB374, SB400

Keywords: military, veterans, education, teaching, Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, licensure, certification, public schools, charter schools, school social worker, school counselor, school psychologist, internship, practicum, student support services, mental health, harassment, bullying, power-based violence, school safety

Transcript Highlights:

• This time we'll open up the testimony on Senate Bill 1214.
• I will go back and reset public testimony. The testimony will be limited to two minutes.
• To provide the committee with testimony, I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
• I'll let testimony be heard.
• Thank you both for your testimony. I appreciate it. Senator Hancock.

Bills: SCR13, SB1248

Keywords: water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, TPWD, harvest reports, wildlife harvest data, public information act, open records, confidentiality, hunter privacy, angler data, game animals, game birds, fur-bearing animals, nongame animals

Transcript Highlights:

• They want to hear what the testimony was.
• There is all of that testimony out there that really will inform the decisions that have to be made,
• was there was great the test testimony was there was great testimony<00:07:31.960> from<00:07
• district officials testimony from school district officials that<00:07:34.000> are<00:07:34.240
• two years there is all of that testimony two years there is all of that testimony out<00:07:42.919

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House Republican leaders used the briefing to argue that Democrats were absent from the House for the 16th day, calling it a shutdown and saying the absence was preventing the chamber from doing its work. They said Republicans were still meeting in person with constituents, interest groups, pages, and agencies, and were continuing unofficial committee meetings and line-by-line budget work even though formal bill introduction and committee operations were disrupted. The discussion focused heavily on negotiations over whether any Democrats might return, whether there were talks with Leader Hortman or Leader Long, and whether a power-sharing arrangement was possible. The speaker said there were no direct discussions with Hortman that day, no talks with Long, and no side agreements, but that any Democrat who returned would have a place to work. They rejected the idea of equal power-sharing under the current 67-66 House split and said the immediate issue was simply getting members back to work before the May 19 end of session. The speaker also said the Supreme Court decision had negated prior work, including bill introductions, and that the House was trying to preserve the historical record while committee videos and bills were restored. They pointed to testimony from school district officials about financial challenges from prior Democratic mandates as an example of the work that had been done before the process was interrupted. No votes were taken, and no new official legislative action was announced.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:05.479> with treat people giving testimony with treat people giving testimony with
• Thank you for your testimony.
• <01:32:23.199> um rivan thank you for your testimony um rivan thank you for your testimony
• <02:42:10.840> from 1:10 and we'll pick up testimony from 1:10 and we'll pick up testimony
• I appreciate your testimony.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• cuz I didn't I from your testimony cuz I didn't I from your testimony sounded<00:05:04.120> like
• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Any questions from the committee? Thank you for your testimony.
• And what we're seeing here... thank you for your testimony thank you for your testimony questions<01:
• And with that, happy to conclude testimony and answer any questions. Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• coste effective in my written testimony coste effective in my written testimony what<01:02:19.319
• want to spoil that testimony yet.
• to spoil that testimony yet can I ask a to spoil that testimony yet can I ask a followup<01:18:43.159
• That was your testimony.
• specifically I'll give you my testimony specifically I'll give you my testimony but<04:16:13.159

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• No testimony was received at the hearing.
• Chair Pyle and members of the committee, this completes my testimony.
• We're handing out the testimony plus our proposals.
• We had one person in attendance and no oral testimony was given.
• Many of those nine also provided written testimony.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• No testimony was received at the hearing.
• We're handing out the testimony plus our proposals.
• So in my testimony there... All the proposals and to accept them.
• We had one person in attendance and no oral testimony was given.
• Many of those nine also provided written testimony.

Summary: The Administrative Rules Committee met on June 11 and first approved the March 12, 2026 minutes by voice vote. It then granted the Board of Medicine an extension of time to implement rules tied to recent legislation, including North Dakota’s participation in the physician assistant licensure compact and a new physician nutrition continuing education requirement. The Board said it was waiting on compact rules and fee information before finalizing its own changes. The committee heard a lengthy presentation from the Office of Management and Budget on broad personnel rule revisions, including salary administration, recruitment, leave, sick leave, funeral leave, service awards, appeals, and shared leave. OMB said the changes modernize HR language and implement recent legislation such as enhanced annual leave for hard-to-fill positions and new hire leave. Members questioned the hard-to-fill leave provisions, but OMB and counsel said those standards come from statute, not the rules. The committee also heard and accepted rule packages from the Lottery, the Board of Examiners for Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, the State Electrical Board, the Industrial Commission, PERS, and Health and Human Services, with each agency describing mostly technical, clarifying, or statutory-conforming changes and noting the public notice and comment process. The most significant action came during the Gaming Commission rules presentation. After questioning whether the commission had authority to raise the poker tournament buy-in limit from $300 to $1,500, members moved to void Section 99-01.3-09-01 on the ground that the agency lacked statutory authority for that change. The motion passed on a roll call vote. The committee also discussed several gaming-related issues, including online raffles, kiosk use, advertising restrictions, and the broader policy question of whether charities should be allowed to own bars, but took no further formal action on those topics.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, seeing none, we will move to testimony. Thank you, Chair Ornshaw.
• I'll just give my testimony now.
• We will open up testimony for Senate Bill 422.
• Stone just said in her testimony, and I urge you.
• Each person has two minutes to provide testimony.

Bills: AB534, AB562, AB595, AB597, AB600, SB74, SB226, SB422, SB488

Keywords: election reform, voter accessibility, conditional ballots, voter registration, mechanical voting systems, election audits, voter access grants, provisional ballot, voting technology, AB562, Nevada, Secretary of State, elections, elections management system, HAVA, Help America Vote Act, automatic voter registration, AVR, election technology, state appropriations